Fresh and Exciting

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

This movie came out during Project Mohole intended to drill into the mantle. I've always assumed this movie was a take on that activity. Though the Mohole was a failure, "Crack in the World" was a solid success.The science was implausible even at the time. You'd never try this anywhere but the ocean floor and flying a conventional rocket down into the Earth was frankly ridiculous and looked goofy even to my 11 year old self.But those deficiencies don't notably detract from the fine performances and well-directed suspense. The movie moves along nicely with only a couple of draggy romance scenes. The special effects were well-done and quite convincing for the mid-1960s. All the characters are plausible and deliver equally plausible lines. Dana Andrews elderly stud good looks and mellifluous voice are a joy to watch. Kieron Moore, as always, plays the hunk with broad-shoulders and large biceps who always knows the right thing to do - and can do it all himself. Janette Scott is underused except as attractive scenery and damsel in distress.Definitely worth the time it takes to watch.

In my opinion, this is one of the best classic science fiction movies ever made, right up with The War of the Worlds (1953), The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) and Forbidden Planet (1956).To us in 2011, its special effects might be laughable, and yes we know that you wouldn't fire a missile down a hole to punch into magma with a nuclear warhead. But it is a delightfully unique story of ingenuity that contains a major element that *has* come to pass, albeit not as the writers foresaw - the development of geothermal energy. It also showcases a time 55 years ago when no one had any idea what the inside of the Earth was like! The movie was based on best-guess geology, and what they developed made it fun. Further, it notes the potential dangers of messing with Mother Earth unless you're absolutely sure of what you're doing.Many pieces of technology and social graces speak well to illustrate a period in history that many of us were either too young to remember, or not even born yet.As I said, this is not Industrial Light and Magic, but the special effects are great for the period. I have and always will be a fan of using detailed miniatures.I gave this movie a very high rating because it's just a good flick to sit down and watch. The story is fun and interesting, but not heavy. The science is wrong but at least they tried, and you have to smile at that. Astonishingly, the casting and acting is decent as well.Be sure to find some time for this movie, and don't be afraid, this is *not* a 1956 version of "The Core." They are entirely different movies of both type and quality.

It is hard to look at some movies as being little more then a list of clichés. A story about a group of scientists attempt to unlock what they hope will be a vast depositary of energy and minerals underneath the Earth's crust that leads to unintended consequences for the entire world, 1964's Crack In The World would certainly be one of that type. So should you watch it? The acting in the movie is good for the most part. Leading the cast is Dana Andrews as Dr. Stephen Sorenson, the head of the group of scientists, and indeed gives perhaps the best performance seen in the entire ninety odd minutes the movies runs for. Playing his much younger scientist wife is Janette Scott as Maggie, whose performance goes from most believable at the beginning before she turns into the clichéd screaming female character out of innumerable sci-fi films of the era. Completing the main cast is Kieron Moore as Dr. Ted Rampion, who not only predicts certain disaster but is also a former flame of Maggie's, which given the lack of chemistry between Moore and Scott seems hard to believe. Indeed there is a distinct lack of chemistry between all three of the leading cast members. While both Andrews and Moore give good performances, the lack of chemistry between not just themselves but Scott doesn't help the movie.The production values are as mixed as anything else in the movie. The production design of Eugene Lourie is perhaps the biggest strength of the whole movie, particularly with its impressive set of the project's operation center. The special effects though are mixed as they range from the excellent models and effects seen during the first thirty to thirty five minutes to the film to some incredibly unconvincing back projection work as the movie reaches its end. Other production values, such as the score by John Douglas and the direction of Andrew Marton, give the entire film a very dated feel. The editing of Derek Parsons is also very much of the era, meaning that despite running a little over ninety minutes the film drags horribly along during that time. The result is that the movie looks good for the most part but heavily dated and slow moving as well.Nothing though dates Crack In The World more then its script by Jon Manchip White and Julian Zimet. The script has a neat idea as its basis: that the Earth's crust, weakened by decades of nuclear tests, could be cracked open and threaten all life on Earth. A neat idea, though it went out of date the year following the movie's original release. But the premise is an intriguing one though its execution is anything but. The script throws in every cliché it can seemingly come up with: a love triangle between two rival scientists (one older, one younger) over the former's wife, the prediction of catastrophe ignored, a failed attempt to avert disaster and fleeing members of the general public being killed as they do say to name but a few. The result is a neat idea bogged down by a list of clichés.Despite the occasional good performance and a neat (if outdated) idea as its basis, Crack In The World is weighed down heavily by the many, many clichés it employs along the way. It also doesn't help that the film is horribly dated by much of its production values as well. The overall result then is that the movie is watchable, if only just.

Many things in the world of science fiction, come from the reality of science itself. Man has always thought, if there was some way to harness the hot volcanic magma in the center of the earth, it could supply the energy needs of the entire world. In this film, a top Geo-scientist, Dr. Stephen Sorenson (Dana Andrews) plans to use a nuclear tipped missile to punch a hole into the crust of Earth's mantle and release all the energy stored therein. His colleague, a former student of his and rival for the affections of the heroine, Maggie Sorenson, (Janette Scott), is Dr. Ted Rampion (Kieron Moore) who warns emphatically that such an explosion could cause a gigantic, world-wide catastrophic 'crack' in the earth's surface which could destroy it. Alexander Knox plays Sir Charles Eggerston one of many members of the Earth's council, whom Sorenson eventually convinces of the safe feasibility of the project. The film is highlighted by magnificent explosions and dramatic action scenes which prove, this movie should have garnered more attention when it dominated the marquees of the day. All in all a great cult film for all ****